dhc6twinotter

Fantastic crane! Great functions, great color combo, and love the song on the video. I'm trying to figure out how 9 functions were accomplished with 8 motors. This is a really nice crane.

I only have one set, the 8412 Nighthawk helicopter, which uses two flex cables to tilt the swashplate. I really love the flex cables, and I wish Lego still produced sets with them. Both of my cables and ends are still in good condition. The only time I've used the flex system was when building helicopter and airplane mocs. They are definitely a useful part to have.

Very nice! I love aircraft mocs! I'm looking forward to the video, and I'm especially interested in the RAT, reverse thrust, and elavons mechanisms. Nicely done!

That blue part in the above pictures looks like a new part.

Wow...both those trucks are awesome! I haven't seen either one of those before. My suggestion for working steering to differentiate Model Team from Creator comes from my observation of what Lego has done in their own model designs. From what I can tell, every Model Team vehicle has had working steering. Some models have a knob on the roof, and other models have a working steering wheel. With the introduction of Power Functions, I think PF would be considered in this category as well. To my knowledge, none of the Creator sets have working steering. This would be an easy way to differentiate between Model Team and Creator. In the case of a helicopter, or anything else besides a vehicle, I could see how there may be thin line between Model Team and Creator. I don't really have a good answer to that. I don't think any of the Model Team helicopters sold by Lego had crank operated rotors, so there isn't really anything mechanical in any of those models. So, I can see how my suggestion in my last post may be hard to implement; and, while I think it would be nice to separate Creator from Model Team, it would be more confusing than it's worth. I really don't have a problem with things as is, and I would be perfectly happy if the Technic forum stayed as is. More front page coverage would be nice though. Just my $.02.

To be honest, I really like the layout as is. I'm not very fond of placing all MOCs together. That would be too confusing and too difficult to find anything, unless there was a way to easily sort by theme. For the time being, I think we should keep Technic and Model Team together. In my opinion, there isn't very much traffic in either category to warrant a split. That being said though, some of the MOCs I've seen in the Technic forum seem like they would be better placed in a Creater forum. Perhaps we could break it down into something simple like does the vehicle have working steering? If so, it goes in Technic. If not, it goes in Creator. When I browse the Technic forum, I'm more interested in the mechanical aspects of a model. If there isn't anything mechanical, I'm not really that interested (with a few exceptions). I do think the Technic forum could use more front page coverage. Since I've been a member, I have only seen two MOCs from this forum listed on the front page. To be frank, I've seen some MOCs from other themes that really didn't seem deserving of front page status, but yet amazing builds like Seriel's Tow Truck never made it. More exposure on the front page may offer more exposure to the Technic forum as well. Just my $.02 on that.

If you use that piece, you will also have to buy the "Technic Ball with Grooves" and "Technic Propeller 4 Blade 7 Stud Diameter with Square Ends". You need those two pieces, plus the piece you mentioned to build a Technic swash plate. You should be able to find a different way of building the rotor head and swash plate without that part, but you will need some Technic pins with towball and some links. Having that part would make it easier though. You might be able to build a more functionally realistic rotor system while you're at it. Most Technic helicopters built don't really work like the real helicopters, and I've only seen a handful that do. Just my $.02.

Pretty clever looking contraption right there.

Thanks guys, I think I'm just going to order the u-joints off bricklink.

Hey all, I noticed the Lego Education site had a 10 pack of u-joints for $10. Here is a link: http://www.legoeducation.us/store/detail.aspx?KeyWords=universal+joint&by=20&ID=835&c=0&t=0&l=0 Has anybody ordered this 10 pack from Lego Ed? Does anybody know if these are the 3L or 4L u-joints? The picture is a 4L, but I was under the assumption that all the Lego u-joints were now 3L, so I thought maybe it's an old picture. Thanks! Daniel

Wow...very cool! Love that multi steer mode.

I would love to own a VW single cab.

Well, after looking at your diagram again and building a mockup, my suggestion won't work. The axle connectors used on the connecting rods hit the upper block. I'm out of ideas. I don't really think there is a way of doing this without moving the upper block away from the lower piston block by 1 stud. There isn't enough clearance in the current configuration.

Yeah, if you use the ball joint pieces on the end, the pivot point will be slightly different than using a 3L axle with stop. You should have barely enough clearance using this method, although I'm not sure if connecting rods would clear the upper block.

Because you are using an LA and motor for your grapple, I would suggest placing the motor at the backside of the telescopic portion of the boom. That way, the motor slides with the telescopic part of the boom. Connect your motor to the grapple via axles and a u-joint. The only downside to the above idea is that it puts the weight of the motor in your boom. You may also be able to build the boom with the motor towards the base near the turntable (better for weight distribution), but this requires a complex drive system through the telescopic portion of the boom. This is the method I'm using on my current project, a JCB backhoe with telescopic stick. If you can give me a week or so, I can take some pictures of my solution, which I think may help in your situation. Not sure if you really want to go this route though (it's not really as necessary in your application).

Sorry for the double post. Snipe, sorry, I just read that you already tried the dual crank idea. I should read more before posting...lol. I would suggest building your own connecting rods. I don't think you will have a problem with the connecting rods hitting the inside edge of your cylinder.

This looks like a fun project! What functions would you like your crane to have? Are you wanting to include a telescopic boom and rotating grapple? Those two items would the hardest to incorporate. Will you be using pneumatics or LAs for your crane arm? Will you use any PF elements?

I would suggest doing this in one of two ways: 1) Like Nequmodiva suggested, you could use two cranks on the bottom set of pistons. 2) You could build your own connecting rods similar to the 8051 motorbike, but you would have to use the "Technic, Axle and Pin Connector Toggle Joint Smooth" part. I'm not sure if this solution would fit, but it might be worth trying. Just my $.02.

You may also try the "Technic, Disk 5 x 5 - Notched, No Pattern, WITH PIN" part.

Very cool. I love aircraft mocs!

The "Technic, disk 3x3" part may work as well:

I'm quite happy with what I see so far in the set. We don't need another Technic model that has PF elements. IMHO, working suspension, steering, and a fake engine are all that a proper Techinc off-road set needs. As mentioned earlier, I really like all the black panels as well. I'm guessing this set will be in the $50-$60 USD range, and if so, I will be buying it. Based on what I see so far, I'd rather have this set than the supercar.

Awesome, see you there Joe! Daniel

I agree. Pressure regulator is the way to go.

I'm excited to see the large black panels. I've been waiting a while for Lego to finally make those panels in black! Woohoo! I think the tire size is 68.7x34r (same size as the front tires on the backhoe set).